Letters to the Editor

Green lipstick

May 29, 2009


To the editor:

Sen. Roberts knows how to put green lipstick on a porker. He claims that the 32nd Street route for the South Lawrence Trafficway could be constructed “without any danger to the environment” (Journal-World, May 27). He’s fully aware this is a pig in a poke. He’s been involved with highways long enough to understand 10 lanes of traffic, particularly convoys of trucks throughout the night, would permanently degrade this environment considerably beyond the wide strip actually buried under concrete.

Kansas Secretary of Transportation Deb Miller finally acknowledged the SLT would be four lanes designed to later become six lanes. The six lanes coming from Johnson County are nearly shovel-ready. The turnpike is already six lanes from Topeka to Lawrence. They would build another four lanes relocating 31st Street right beside the SLT. Standing on the boardwalk you are in the path of those future 10 lanes.

Regardless of how many millions are spent “mitigating” elsewhere, the heart of this place would be permanently damaged. Biodiversity would plummet. Roberts wants you to believe a couple more million spent erecting concrete “noise barriers” will protect the environment. Hogwash, or more precisely, greenwash. These expensive walls weren’t designed to protect wetlands. They add insult to the injury caused Native Americans who consider this place a sacred part of their history, a location intimately associated with their survival in the face of our government’s campaign of cultural extinction.

Inexcusably, the article didn’t once mention Native Americans, only “others who consider the existing wetlands to have environmental, cultural and historical significance.”

Caron is from Lawrence


SeaFox 6 years, 4 months ago

Where are we getting this "10 lanes" crap from? I haven't heard of the SLT being that large anywhere.

Richard Heckler 6 years, 4 months ago

The other questions that arise are how many tax dollars are Douglas County tax payers ready to pork over for roads that are not truly necessary?

This SLT, it has been noted, will not make 23rd any better in spite of what local developers keep saying. Too many new homes and 30,000 students will keep 23rd very busy most of all the time. The SLT is not about traffic relief and never has been. It's about increasing the cost of community services aka increasing our taxes.

How you ask? New development. New roads and developers are big budget items for tax payers.

Following the construction of the SLT,if not before, comes the $88 million sewage treatment plant,which in and of itself increases the cost of community services.

Then expect: water and sewer lines streets and repairs public schools fire stations law enforcement manpower sidewalks snow removal bike trails and cross walks Traffic signals Traffic calming developers requesting more tax dollar assistance(new infrastructure) for their warehouses and retail strip malls. In general increases the cost of community services to all taxpayers. *Last but certainly not least more houses. Our city's current budget crunch could easily be tied directly to infrastructure expenses needed to serve new housing developments. The community is way over extended in this regard.

If residential growth paid for itself and was financially positive, we would not be in a budget crunch. But with increased numbers of houses you have increased demand on services, and historically the funding of revenues generated by residential housing does not pay for the services, they require from a municipality.

Why not IMPACT FEES to fund all of the above. This way all new residents and other new tenants pick up the tab. Instead of older neighborhood tax dollars funding new growth while our neighborhoods go down the tubes due to neglect.

classclown 6 years, 4 months ago

SeaFox (Anonymous) says…

Where are we getting this “10 lanes” crap from? I haven't heard of the SLT being that large anywhere.


Well Michael Caron believes it as this isn't his first letter on the subject. http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/apr... http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2001/oct...

And his views are shared by one LJWorld user http://www2.ljworld.com/comments/cr/303/494200/#c877641 http://www2.ljworld.com/comments/cr/303/478323/#c720403

So apparently there are two people in Lawrence with the exact same thoughts on this. Maybe there are others that think that not only will the SLT will be ten lanes, but it involves racism towards Indians as well, but these two people are the only ones that put their thoughts on the subject in writing

Who knows how many people share these exact same thoughts.

Michael Caron 6 years, 4 months ago

Not everyone can count, but some-hopefully- can still read. The source of the ten lanes can't be much more precisely laid out than in this article. Deb Miller, head of KDOT, says the SLT itself will be 4 lanes initially, and that 46' gap between the east and west lanes is there so the trafficway can be expanded to 6 lanes later. The other 4 lanes are essential to the "32nd Street" plan, which requires KDOT to build a new 31st Street right beside the SLT itself, separated by a million dollar 12' high "sound wall". Since these walls reflect traffic noise back, and there would be traffic on BOTH sides of this wall, the notion that it will protect anything is aimed at the same folks who can't count to ten.

Michael Caron 6 years, 4 months ago

I didn't intend to suggest everyone who does not realize there would eventually be 10 lanes in the wetlands if KDOT has its way can't read. Most simply do not have the time or inclination to study the "32nd Street plan" that was approved by the Corps of Engineers. Diehard proponents, on the other hand, have a strong inclination to avoid looking beyond the tip of their nose because concrete facts make the SLT much harder to sell.

George Lippencott 6 years, 4 months ago

Please stop insulting my intelligence. The critters in the “wetlands” will move to the new wetlands. I know because I had a long conversation with them! It never ceases to amaze me that groups opposed to the SLT will defend the critters to their last gasps while forcing people out of their home for various social purposes – and there is no mitigation for the people! This argument is overcome by events!

I suppose that I must accept unconditionally the argument of a number of Native Americans that the land slated for the SLT is sacred. There is no proof. Clearly, back in the mid 1800s there was no special Native American tie to this land. The best I can glean from the argument is that Native Americans hold all land sacred therefore, the land for the SLT is sacred. I guess we all should start transferring the titles to our homes because that argument carried to a logical conclusion says we all built on sacred land without permission. Hogwash!

It is fine to not want the SLT. It is not fine to create mythical arguments and then make personal attacks on those that point out the speciousness of those arguments. In fact, it is frightening. Demonizing disagreement seems to be a rising methodology in the arsenal of the left. The historic notion in our culture is you carry the argument by force of logic (or payments to the elected officials) not by personal attacks on your opponents or is that another aspect of our culture we have discarded for the bright communist future!

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 4 months ago

George, that was a truly impressive defense of your willful ignorance and a stellar demonstration of your inability to understand anything but your own self-interest.

George Lippencott 6 years, 4 months ago

The arguments on growth have now arisen. If you build it, they will come! Who? Commuting to our near-by cities has become quite expensive and will likely become more so. A bedroom community we may no longer be! Maybe KU will continue to expand. One might think that the continued increases in tuition might just slow down attendance if not reverse it? Perhaps there will be a large influx of --- well I am at a loss here –help me!

Our lawgivers are jumping through hoops trying to attract jobs for our local population. There are hints in the census that our growth is slowing and perhaps reversing. This despite approved (during the last administration) plans for growth to the south and east. Just what great events will an SLT trigger resulting in a greater influx then our plan evokes?

Frankly, I hope there will be some growth. If we are going to continue to expand our national population through immigration then we need a place for our new citizens to live. We should be expected to take our fair share.

Michael Caron 6 years, 4 months ago

George, I can't do much here to calm your fear that the opponents of paving the wetlands are part of a communist conspiracy. If you really care to understand anything about Native American sacred places I would suggest two excellent books: Peter Nabakov's The Place Where Lightning Strikes, and Keith Basso's Wisdom Sits in Places. As to the Haskell alumni and others who view this particular wetland as a sacred place, it would take far longer to explain that than is possible here. I'll try to address that in a Wetlands History blog I'm going to attempt to get started soon. But even there it will require several steps for those who care to understand this complex issue. There are many different tribes and traditions. Lumping them together as "the" Indian view is as ludicrous as it would be to presume you and I see the world through the same white eyes.

George Lippencott 6 years, 4 months ago

SW2 (Anonymous) says… to paraphrase: You just do not understand.
I understand that a small group is using the pretense of religion to thwart the will of many other people. As you have demonstrated again, if you do not agree - you are ignorant. I do not challenge the right of groups to believe in anything they want. I challenge the right of those groups to use their beliefs to demand unconditional agreement with their cause. We cannot let small groups envelop themselves in "religion" to block things they do not like. The logical extension is chaos. I can hear the thunder. “I do not like abortions for religious reasons - hence there will be no abortions". Yes, that is where your argument extends!

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 4 months ago

So, George, all you have to do is invoke some sort of "greater good," (however specious) and your special interests can trump any others? How convenient.

madameX 6 years, 4 months ago

I don't think it's true that all SLT opponents are opposed solely in the name of religion. Some are, I'm sure, but others are opposed because of environmental concerns, and still other (I'm in more this group) are opposed because it seems unnecessary to throw so much money and so many resources at something that seems not to be needed all that badly. I'm sure I'll get reamed for this, I don't think we need to build a whole new road at all when simple improvements to an existing road (31st street) would likely ease much of the congestion that seems to be a problem.

As a side note, I'd be interested to see some sort of poll of Lawrence residents to actually find out where people stand on the issue, because for all the message-board nastiness that gets thrown around, I honestly have no idea what percentage of the population wants the SLT v. what percentage doesn't, and why.

MaryKatesPillStash 6 years, 4 months ago

Madame, I am also in your school of thought. People who are looking to zip past Lawrence without having to encounter local traffic will be satisfied. However, people hoping that this will improve the level of service of 23rd Street will be disappointed. Traffic models of this alignment still indicate a LOS of F for 23rd Street.

CNA_Resident 6 years, 4 months ago

Lippencott and other proletarian 'gitter-dun' wetland route advocates know that the 'will of the people' has ~always~ been a contrived argument! He forgets that one old Douglas County man stood up, went to court and asked about representation without taxation ~decades ago~ upon learning about the bypass-er-trafficway issue in the newspaper -- as we all learned about this lame C-Y-A excuse for the county (and city) to hold onto the 31st Street cut across HINU property --

He should know, and has been around long enough to understand that the SLB-er-SLT was decided by a few good 'ole boys at the county and city commissions, along with their buddies in the development enclave of Douglas County. He also prefers to ignore the looooooonnnnnng history of illegal tactics, stunts and sidestepping the state Department of Transportation has been caught doing time-and-again throughout this incredible debacle, along with their cohorts in-lockstep, the Corps of Engineers.

~That~ comprises his 'will of the people' list - in fact and deed, but heh, these details - they're just so pesky!! And while we're at it, Lippencott - have you yet to visit the graveyard of all those NI children in the back SE corner of Haskell?

gccs14r 6 years, 4 months ago

31st needs to come out, too. There is functioning wetland on both sides of 31st, and it's long past time to take out the barrier between them.

George Lippencott 6 years, 4 months ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

I can take or leave the SLT. That is not my issue!

There are legitimate arguments about priorities, costs and traffic among others. I dispute religion and "critters". There will be other environmental impacts.

I do believe in process. A lengthy process has been completed. As near as I can tell the rules were followed. The outcome I am told is an approved right of way awaiting funding.

Why now do so many of you get to impose your solution?? Because you say so!?? Sounds like sour grapes!

Richard Heckler 6 years, 4 months ago

We now have several reasons not to fill in the Wetlands with expensive elevated roadways,bridges and expensive walls:

  1. Plan is 30 years old and obsolete
  2. Elevated Roadways are too expensive
  3. An I -70 connector is being built in Leavenworth County which can accommodate many many local drivers and it is a toll road = users pay
  4. Respect for spiritual values of our Native American brothers and sisters
  5. Wetlands is a natural flood control which saves tax payers tons upon tons of tax dollars and this one works no matter how much Mother Nature rains. Why replace a natural working flood control? 5.Is an educational asset to the city and county and one that cannot be matched by any new man made creation.
  6. It cost too many tax dollars which in fact no one knows what the expenditure would be. THIS IS NO WAY TO TREAT TAXPAYERS or DO BUSINESS.
  7. 31st expansion is on the table and no dollar numbers have been attached to this project as yet.
  8. Commuters are still getting to work on time and moved here knowing what it would take.
  9. In general is a huge increase to our Cost of Coummunity Services when taking into consideration all of the new development which would follow that which does not pay back the taxpayers.
  10. Louie McElheney offered a plan for a second bypass not too long ago in a meeting at the courthouse discussing this very matter. Taxpayers cannot afford the SLT much less two.

=========================== I-70 connectors east of Eudora were potential choices. This concept accomplishes many things.

It services: • Johnson and Douglas county traffic going to northwest Lawrence or Topeka. Or Topeka going to JOCO. • the Eudora Business Park east of 1057. • East Hills Business Park and the southeast Lawrence industrial park. • the Lawrence airport. And it: • diverts traffic around the city. • keeps the SLT out of the wetlands. • reduces congestion for morning and afternoon commuters. • might save Douglas County taxpayers millions of dollars. • Eliminates use of tax dollars. • Eliminates the need for an eastern bypass * Would not dump fast moving traffic off uncomfortably close to the congested Lawrence city limits • allows KTA fees to pay for the highway and maintenance.

madameX 6 years, 4 months ago

"Why now do so many of you get to impose your solution?? Because you say so!?? Sounds like sour grapes!"

What? People have been railing against the SLT from the beginning for those the very reasons you cite. Regardless of whether or not you consider those reasons valid you can hardly accuse anyone of sitting on the sidelines through the preliminary approval process and just now jumping in with them. They've been there all along.

George Lippencott 6 years, 4 months ago

madameX (Anonymous) says…

Absolutely, but your comments did not stop the road. Why? If you are right then the process is flawed. Why do you apparently think so?

merrill (Anonymous) says…

Why were all of these ignored? Senator Roberts is all powerful?? The Johnson County delegation is all powerful? Other? They just were not compelling?

At some point the war must end. Are we there yet?? Apparently not - once more with feeling!

CNA_Resident 6 years, 4 months ago

Lippencott, does 'Git-er-dun' in your world mean "spend $Millions of taxpayer dollars more ~now~" .... ramming a multi-lane roadbed through wetland (get it? w-e-t-l-a-n-d), or could it mean .... "uhm - move it South of the River" to an already established ($Millions less) roadbed that takes drivers straight to the Leavenworth C.R. One Interchange? Ya know ... the one with I-70, K-10 and K-24 access .... ~that~ Interchange that's almost completed already?

I've already tried to 'splain to you that KDOT proved themselves able to pimp out their lawyers as undercover "Just An Concerned Citizen" to residents of Lawrence - YEARS ago, in a covert effort to move-Move-MOVE their (not-so-secret) plan hatched while in bed with the Corps of Engineers ... and when the guy was outed as a secret-agent KDOT staff lawyer, they sacrificed his tenured derrierre out of KDOT claiming "WWEEEE knew Nuzzeeeng" about it. So, I'm still waitin' for you to do some 'splainin' on simple basic logic, Lucy.

Someone .... ~anyone~ .... pretty-please explain to Mr. Lippencott how it makes sense NOT to run a SOR route on C.R. 1100 to c-o-n-n-e-c-t Hwy. 59 to the Leavenworth Interchange, hmmmm? Oh, yeah - that new interchange includes Hwy. 24, Hwy. 40, I-70, K-10 ... and at a reduced (that's spelled n-o n-e-w t-a-x-e-s) cost on an already-established roadbed ($Millions less) that can ~easily~ be widened to a four-lane bypass ....?

Oh, CRAP! I forgot, this ain't a bypass like it wuz' ~originally~ presented to the good citizens and taxpayers of Douglas County .. well, details, details, (sing-along everybody!) 'dey just keep changin' - 'dey just keep changin' along!!

P.S. Oh yeah - ~when~ do you plan to visit the American Indian children's cemetary, Lippencott?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 4 months ago

This was never anything more than a foregone conclusion hatched in secret by a small group of movers and shakers looking to profit from it. They cobbled together a fraud of a "process" to foist "legitimacy" on it, with the ultimate decisions made by organizations whose sole purpose is to lay pavement, all funded by the masters of highway pork.

There was never any serious consideration of the wishes or desires, let alone the culture or history, of all stakeholders-- namely, the American Indians for whom Haskell was ostensibly established, and from whom the wetlands were quite blatantly stolen.

George Lippencott 6 years, 4 months ago


You all believe that the process was stacked. Why did the court not agree with you? Is it stacked also?

I am sorry about the cemetary and all the other cemetaries in this country that got moved or paved over. Why is this one special?

CNA_Resident (Anonymous

I must have missed the tutorial on KDOT?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 4 months ago

"Why did the court not agree with you?"

What court are you referring to?

Michael Caron 6 years, 4 months ago

George appears to have convinced himself that the federal court has ruled in favor of the KDOT plan. Where he got that notion would probably reveal a lot about how he gathers his facts. The last round in federal court did not turn out at all well well for FHWA, the Corps, or KDOT. When they appealed the ruling against them to the 10th circuit court in Denver they lost again. That court also affirmed our side's position. FHWA then walked away, only to return after Roberts ear marked $1.5 million, making it a requirement that they get reinvolved.

As to the current lawsuit, absolutely no ruling has been issued by the court. Whenever a ruling does come everyone knows KDOT will again appeal if they lose. We will do the same if the lower court proves to be blind to blatant environmental injustice. George may think the court has spoken, but like a lot of other things he has posted today, that does not make it true.

gl0ck0wn3r 6 years, 4 months ago

"Richard Heckler (Anonymous) says… The other questions that arise are how many tax dollars are Douglas County tax payers ready to pork over for roads that are not truly necessary?"

Your own pro-tax advocacy for projects that are demonstrable failures (i.e. the T) makes this post even more amusing.

Ronda Miller 6 years, 4 months ago

Mike, so glad to see that you continue to fight this cause that you so believe in. I respect that about you.

notajayhawk 6 years, 4 months ago

gccs14r (Anonymous) says…

"31st needs to come out, too. There is functioning wetland on both sides of 31st, and it's long past time to take out the barrier between them."

When are you selling your house, gcc, and returning the land to its original condition?

Every bit of land in Lawrence belonged to someone else or was something else or was in a different state before any of you whiners and complainers got there. But as long as you got yours, right?

I can only sincerely wish that someone had protested just as vehemently as merrill about excess development before his own home was built.

altarego 6 years, 4 months ago

I want my own cultural traditions respected, so I have a question:

If the SLT is not built, where in heck will they put the new Hooters? I vote 6wak!

BigPrune 6 years, 4 months ago

When Highway 59 opens up as 4 lanes from Lawrence to Ottawa and the increased traffic generates 50,000 vehicles down 23rd Street daily (20,000 more than today), it won't matter what the letter to the editor writer gripes about, the SLT WILL get finished. The populus will demand it.

Leslie Swearingen 6 years, 4 months ago

I think we should have more respect for the Native Americans. They know far better than the rest of us what is sacred to them. Why not build an elevated highway over the wetlands, on pylons? It would protect the area and drivers could get a good look and might be more inclined to see them as something that needs to be preserved.

gccs14r 6 years, 4 months ago

Why would someone go from Ottawa to Kansas City via Lawrence? That's just stupid.

George Lippencott 6 years, 4 months ago

I surrender! You all are just too committed. I will recheck my facts on the court!

George Lippencott 6 years, 4 months ago

I un-surrender. I am confused.

The EIS is approved after court ordered update. Is that the favorable decision to which you refer? An approved EIS suggests that all court requirements have been met! The right of way survey is being updated. The 32 street alignment is selected.

There are no active court orders that I can find to the contrary. I believe a new case is somewhere in the process to challenge the above.

Help me, what is stopping the progress of the SLT other than funding and a lot of people that do not like it.

There was a reference to further inaccuracies on my part. What? Or are we tarring with a broad brush because I am a luddite! ??

I remind you I could care less about the road but I do care about the process.

Richie Kennedy 6 years, 4 months ago

Let me see if I can clear the waters:

  • Northern Crayfish Frog v. FHWA: The 1990 EIS was challenged on grounds that a south-of-the-river SLT was rejected. The court ruled that the EIS was not "fatally flawed" However, by that time, the SEIS had already been started.

  • Ross v. FHwA: The parties involved could not come to a consensus, so FHwA attempted to back out and allow KDOT and the CoE to continue without their involvement, initiating this suit. The court ruled that they could not do so, and placed an injunction on any work related to 31st Street until the SEIS was completed. As a result, the SEIS was completed with a final decision of "No Action - Lack of Consensus."

  • Pottawatomie Nation v. FHwA: This is the pending litigation. Similarly to Northern Crayfish Frog, it challenges the validity of the 2003 EIS.

In short: No court has voided either the 1990 EIS, 1998 SEIS, or 2003 EIS.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 4 months ago

"In short: No court has voided either the 1990 eis, 1998 seis, or 2003 EIS."

Richie, you should also point out that neither has any court ever ruled against opponents of the SLT, while there most certainly was a ruling against attempts by paver-overs to skirt requirements for EIS's.

Richie Kennedy 6 years, 4 months ago

I can't point that out, bozo, becuse it isn't true: Opponents of the SLT lost in two cases: Northern Crayfish Frog counts as a "loss" for SLT opponents. In addition, SLT opponents contested that the wording on the SLT bond issue was flawed, and that the results of that election be thrown out. That suit was also a loss.

George Lippencott 6 years, 4 months ago

So the process has been satisfied to date and we have a new challenge against some aspect of it, I hope different, from the old challenge??? I am familiar with challenging EISs to wear down the opponents without regard to the merit of the arguments. Could we be doing that?

Michael Caron 6 years, 4 months ago

If KDOT and FHWA did not consider the ruling in Ross vs FHWA a "loss", why on earth would they take it to the federal appeals court in Denver? That ruling was upheld in the higher court. Why would FHWA have thrown up their hands and declared a "no build" with respect to federal involvement if it was a win for their side?

Those decisions were rendered in the 1990s. The EIS that Richie and George are declaring "court approved" was not completed until 2003. How their logic can retroactively have the courts declare that the study was fair and impartial years later is a lot of wishful thinking. Did it meet the legal standard of objectively evaluating all available options before approving a highway through a wetlands? That is the question before the court today. It is very unlikely that either side will give up regardless of what the lower federal court rules. If Richie or George think the courts have already decided this matter they need to do a little more checking. Hope they don't hold their breath until the litigation really is resolved.

There is abundant evidence in KDOT's own correspondence, and the manner in which HNTB configured the south of the river alternative, to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the EIS was "cooked" from the start to show exactly what KDOT wanted to demonstrate: that going south of the river was "more expensive" and less viable than paving the wetlands.

The highway engineer who was hired by the Prairie Band Pottawatomie Nation had no trouble finding a long list of ways that HNTB had deliberately inflated costs and used "apples and oranges" in making things come out the way KDOT wanted them to appear, supporting the 32nd Street plan. Those who do not understand the process actually think impartial government scientists and engineers "studied" the options. Nothing could be further from the truth. In reality KDOT contracts with someone like HNTB, who has more inbreeding with that agency than anything Eisenhower warned about in his famous "military-industrial complex" speech. Check out Deb Miller's resume for a start. The list of HNTB staff who used to work for KDOT, and vice versa, is long and revealing. They know how to stroke one another for fun and profit. Guys like Richie and George get their shorts in a knot worrying about commies under every woodpile, but they pay little attention to the way government and corporate entities create lucrative merry-go-rounds that are the primary welfare system they should be concerned about. No entity in the federal government has been more corrupted by this system of back scratching than the Corps of Engineers, an agency that grew fat budgets and bureaucracies feeding powerful committee chairs expensive pork for the homefolks.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 4 months ago

" Northern Crayfish Frog counts as a “loss” for SLT opponents."

That was long ago, and the specifics of that ruling, and who made it and how it was made are not readily available or fresh in my memory. But from what I remember, there wasn't enough evidence of that frog species' existence in the Haskell Wetlands on which to base a ruling. That hardly negates the fact of the ecological idiocy for this route.

"In addition, SLT opponents contested that the wording on the SLT bond issue was flawed, and that the results of that election be thrown out."

Likewise, the text of this ruling is not readily available. But from what I remember, the court ruled that it didn't matter if the wording was misleading, not that it wasn't misleading. And anyone whose brain wasn't addled by a bias in favor of this route could clearly see how misleading the language on that ballot measure was.

Richie Kennedy 6 years, 4 months ago

I have no idea what you're talking about, SW2 (mike ford? Mike Caron?) but I said that no court had voided any of the EIS's. The 1990 EIS did survive a court challange, the 1999 SEIS, once completed, was obviously not challanged. The 2003 EIS has not been voided - yet... as the case is still pending and, clearly, no preliminary injunctions have been issued.

Since I have not seen your "Shadow EIS," I cannot comment about your diatribe against the agencies you mentioned.

George Lippencott 6 years, 4 months ago

Language is wonderful but.. The facts stand. There is no current court injunction against the SLT! If the courts rule in favor of the plaintiffs in the new action then there may well be.

To me it sound like we are following a normal pattern and nobody is evil. We have on one side the perception of financial and societal gain from a new road and on the other those who do not believe the costs (environmental, fiscal, emotional, cultural, and religious) justify the action.

We have process, however flawed, to sort those issues! It is proceeding! Why the deep emotion and perception of evil?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 4 months ago

Who said anything about evil? Greed, arrogant projection narrow self-interests, complete disregard for the environment and yet another injustice to Native Americans, yes, but evil? I guess we'll all have to decide for ourselves if all of that rises to the level of evil.

"We have process, however flawed,"

No, this started out with secret back room deals, and what we've have had since has been mostly a pretense of "process." It could well be that in the end that process will do the right thing and allow Haskell to regain control of its property, but at present I expect that the most likely outcome is that there will never be any funding for this highway, and the status quo will continue.

George Lippencott 6 years, 4 months ago

Worse than evil- "black hats" in dark rooms! In consideration of your beliefs I hope you are right. That said, if the "powers that be" want this road as badly as you say then funding will appear!

Blog entries

The Miseducation of Pat Roberts by SW2 6 years, 4 months ago

Commenting has been disabled for this item.